the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogRAmme (ARPA)Get to know the largest conservation and sustainable use of tropical forests programme on the planet.

Br asília, NovemBer 2014

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogRAmme (ARPA)Get to know the largest conservation and sustainable use of tropical forests programme on the planet.

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL

PRESIDENT: DILmA ROUssEFFVICE PRESIDENT: mIChEL TEmER

mINIsTRY OF ThE ENVIRONmENT

MINISTER: IZABELLA môNICA VIEIRA TEIxEIRAEXECUTIVE SECRETARY: FRANCIsCO GAETANISECRETARY OF BIODIVERSITY AND FORESTS: ROBERTO BRANDãO CAVALCANTI

DEPARTmENT OF PROTECTED AREAs

DIRECTOR: sERGIO hENRIqUE COLLAçO DE CARVALhO

AmAZON PROTECTED AREAs PROGRAmmE - ARPA

SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER: ThIAGO GIL BARRETO BARROs mINIsTRY OF ThE ENVIRONmENTANEXO 1 – SEPN 505 NORTE, BLOCO B, EDIFíCIO MARIE PRENDI CRUzBRASíLIA, DF - 70730-542TEL.: 55 61 2028 2559

CREDITs

TEXT: mmAFINAL EDITION: FREDERICO BRANDãO – WWF-BRAZILREVIEW: IsADORA FERREIRATRANSLATION: PhILIP REEDCOVER PHOTO: ADRIANO GAmBARINI / WWF-BRAZIL GRAPHIC DESIGN: RIBAmAR FONsECA / sUPERNOVA DEsIGN

THE OPINIONS, COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THIS PUBLICATION BELONG TO MMA. THIS PUBLICATION WAS FINANCED BY WWF-BRAzIL.

PreseNtatioN 6

History 9

PHase i 12

GaiNs made aNd oPeratioNal

difficulties duriNG PHase ii 17

deforestatioN aNd climate cHaNGe 18

PHase ii 20

GaiNs made aNd oPeratioNal

difficulties duriNG PHase ii 23

PHase iii 26

ProGramme evolutioN 30

summARy

Currently, the ARPA includes federal and state strictly protected areas and areas managed for sustainable use. The protected area categories contemplated in the first group include Parks, Ecological Stations and Biological Reserves (corresponding to the

PResentAtion

t he objective of the Amazon Region Protected Areas Programme (ARPA)

is to promote the permanent conservation and protection of the biodiversity of 60 million hectares, an area equivalent to 15% of the Brazilian Amazon. The Brazilian Government Programme, coordinated by the Ministry of Environment (MMA - in portuguese), guarantees financial resources to manage protected

areas and promote sustainable development in the Amazon, through the creation, expansion and strengthening of protected areas. Currently, the programme supports

95 federal and state protected areas covering 52 million hectares in seven Brazilian states (Amazonas, Pará, Rondônia, Roraima, Mato Grosso, Acre and Tocantins), and involves a commitment to include another 8 million hectares as from 2014. The protected areas included in the ARPA programme represent over 35% of the total area covered by protected areas in the country.

The graph below shows the distribution of protected area by category (state or federal area managed by the Chico Mendes Biodiversity Conservation Institute – ICMBio).

PA; 5422,48 ha

AC; 693,98 ha

AP; 860,18 ha

MT; 913,37 ha

RO; 992,89 haTO; 100,41 ha

ICMBio;31672,5 ha

AM;11484,02 ha

icmBio: the chico mendes Biodiversity conservation instituteProtected areas in the states: am (amazonas); ac (acre); aP (amapá); mt (mato Grosso); Pa (Pará); ro (roraima); to (tocantins)

IUCN protected areas management categories I and II), while the second group includes only Extractivist Reserves and Sustainable Development Reserves (categories VI of the IUCN classification). The distribution of these areas is shown on the map below.

6 7

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)

histoRy

o ver the last 12 years, the ARPA has become the largest tropical forest

biodiversity conservation programme in the world and has been nationally established as a policy of the federal government. The ARPA originated in 1998 through and alliance between WWF and the World Bank and was later incorporated into the PPG7 created in 1992 by the Brazilian government in partnership with the the Global Environmental Facility - GEF, WWF and the German government-owned development bank KfW. The objective of this joint effort

was to form a network of protected areas to protect the biodiversity of the Amazon Forest, which at the time was threatened by deforestation but was still relatively intact.

The idea behind the programme gained force at the time due to the

intention to double the coverage of the National System of Protected Areas (SNUC) and the Brazilian government’s commitment to set aside 10% of the Amazon biome as strictly protected areas.

A third determining factor was the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the Brazilian government, the World Bank and GEF, which culminated in the creation of the ARPA in 2002 through the Decree 4326 followed by the formal announcement of the agreement during Rio+10.

The original objective of the ARPA was to promote the expansion of the SNUC (Law number 9985/2000) in the Brazilian Amazon over the following ten-year period by creating and consolidating 50 million hectares of protected areas, by which Brazilian protected areas would cease to be simply ‘paper parks’ and

The original objective of the arPa was to promote the expansion of the sNuc in the Brazilian amazon over the following ten-year period.

BIOLOGICAL REsERVE UATUmã | © CAIO PAMPLONA

Galo-da-serra-do-pará, specie of bird,

located in the Rebio Uatumã

8 9

begin to fulfil their significant role in promoting biodiversity conservation and local sustainable development.

The initial structure of the programme was tied to donations from external agents (GEF, German government and WWF) to the Brazilian Biodiversity Fund (Funbio) and a technical partnership with GTz (today called GIz). Operational arrangements linked donors, the Brazilian Environment Ministry (MMA), Funbio and executing agencies and included an innovative setup which allowed funds to be fully internalized in Brazil via a Civil Society Organization of Public Interest (Oscip). The ARPA’s management structure

consisted of a Program Committee, with representatives from the federal and state governments and civil society, and a Scientific Advisory Panel.

The operational arrangements, including a donation-based financing structure, directed programme activities covering five of the 14 categories of protected areas envisaged by the SNUC:

Parks, Biological Reserves, Ecological Stations, Extractivist Reserves and Sustainable Development Reserves. These categories were considered to have the greatest impact in terms of biodiversity conservation and generation of well-being in the region, and therefore attracted greater interest from potential donors.

The ARPA was conceived to be implemented in three phases, the first of which had an initial duration of four years. Due to the success of the first phase, the ARPA was redesigned, leading to a revision in the duration of the three phases: phase I (2003-2010), phase II (2010-2015) and phase III (2015-2018).

due to the success of the first phase, the arPa was redesigned, leading to a revision in the duration of the three phases

ExTRACTIVE REsERVE RIO UNINI | © JOSâNGELA JESUS10 11

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)

PhAse i

ExTRACTIVE REsERVE mAPUá | © MIGUEL VON BEHR12

© M

ariana Ferreira / WW

F-Brasil

s tructuring began in 2003 after the establishment of the Program Coordination

Unit (UCP) in the MMA. In 2004, the programme was already well structured and ARPA funds began to be channelled to the protected areas. Major advances in programme implementation were made in 2005 and 2006 after the development of the following tools: “conta vinculada” (joint account)1 and the programme’s financial control and management system (Cérebro), both of which provided for the agile distribution of funds to the protected areas; the Protected Areas Assessment Tool (Fauc2); and the Conservation and Investment Strategy (ECI). High levels of program expenditure were maintained

throughout 2006 and 2007, the period during phase I in which the greatest level of execution of the ARPA programme was achieved. The remaining funds available in 2008 and 2009 would no longer be sufficient to maintain the full activities of the protected areas,

leading to reduction in implementation pace. Parallel to this, negotiations regarding the second phase of the programme started during this period.

The main phase I targets were the creation of 18 million hectares of new protected areas and the consolidation of 10 million hectares in protected areas (7 million hectares in existing protected areas and 3 million hectares in areas created by the programme) as shown in the table on page 16:

1 The Conta Vinculada is a mechanism, developed by funbio and approved by the arPa donors, that facilitates the disbursement of small sums at local level. This mechanism gave the protected areas autonomy to directly spend funds controlled by specific rules and criteria defining the eligible inputs and well-defined control mechanisms.

2 monitoring tool modified from the WB/WWf Tracking Tool.

ExTRACTIVE REsERVE BARREIRO DAs ANTAs | © LUCIANO MALANSKI14 15

TARGET REsULT

1 – Create 9 million hectares of strictly protected areas.

13.2 million hectares of strictly protected areas created.

2 – Create 9 million hectares of protected areas managed for sustainable use.

10.8 million hectares of protected areas managed for sustainable use created.

3 – Consolidate 7 million hectares of strictly protected areas.

8.5 million hectares of strictly protected areas consolidated by the end of 2009.

4 – Establish a protected area endowment fund for areas “consolidated” by the ARPA capitalised with US$14 million.

Protected Areas Fund (FAP) established and capitalised with US$24.8 million.

The programme exceeded all established goals, with the creation of 46 new protected areas, covering an area of 24 million hectares, as well as consolidating a total area of 8.5 million hectares in 18 protected areas.

The ARPA provided the following support for 64 federal and state protected areas (32 strictly protected areas and 32 areas managed for sustainable use): purchase of equipment; development and implementation of management plans; and funding of protection, social participation and capacity building activities. This support encompassed 32.5 million hectares of protected areas in various stages of consolidation in the majority of the states of the Legal Amazon, except for the states of Maranhão and Roraima

whose state protected areas are not supported by the programme.

Total funding for phase I was around US$115 million, consisting of almost US$79 of direct and indirect investments by the Brazilian government and donors and US$36 million from the Protected Area Fund (FAP). The main donor during phase I was the German government, with an investment of almost US$49 million.

The Brazilian government matched donated funds on a practically one-to-one basis, including salaries and all financial resources contributed by the government agencies responsible for the management of the protected areas.

Gains made and operational difficulties during phase iThe main gain made was the provision of goods, services and financial resources for the in the field operational activities of protected areas in the face of the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the public administration. Problems included an initial lack of clarity with regard to the role of each institution within the overall programme arrangement, which in turn made the management task enormously complex, and difficulty in anticipating the need to present part of the financial reports. The latter problem was resolved during phase I.

The Programme Committee played an important role in ensuring transparency and in the ARPA construction process by facilitating a debate between civil society and government regarding activities and planning. However, it was not possible to include all operational activities given the operating restrictions imposed by the donors. This led to a project-based management approach, where specific results were defined for specific proposals presented to each donor (proposing goals and results in line with the donations provided), and distinct auditing and control and monitoring of impacts and results mechanisms.

During phase I, the main type of programme expenditure consisted of recurring costs incurred by protected areas, such as out-of-pocket expenses, purchase of airline tickets and fuel, equipment maintenance and every day expenses. This

situation could be considered a “difficulty” given that, at the time, expenditure on investments was expected to have been greater than on recurring costs.

Due to the need to establish specific procedures and tools for the planning of each protected area – a task which was only completed in 2006 – the majority of areas supported

by the programme were unable to achieve the expected performance levels determined for the protected area implementation and consolidation stages during the period 2003 to 2007.

The Programme committee played an important role in ensuring transparency and in the arPa construction process

16 17

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)

Furthermore, the lack of management tools to monitor program activities meant that the planning process was very slow. The development of an integrated set of monitoring, evaluation and planning systems (SisARPA) in 2007 sought to minimise these flaws. The lack of coordination between the members of Scientific Advisory Panel to the Program Committee can also be highlighted as a factor which resulted in the fragmentation of decision-making processes.

With regard to the UCP, a major bottleneck was the lack of this unit’s capacity to adequately process demands. This is something that could have been minimised through the creation of teams consisting of permanent staff members, since the team at the time was largely made up of technicians occupying temporary posts and therefore subject to a high turnaround, leading to periods of discontinuity in the coordination of the programme.

Towards the end of the first phase, the abovementioned project-based approach, which initially led to gains in terms of offering swifter results, began to impair efficiency due to the large scale of the programme. To overcome this problem, the programme improved results monitoring and planning by developing specific tools such as the ECI (Conservation and Investment Strategy), Fauc (Protected Areas Assessment Tool), and PEP (Pluriannual Strategic Planning). To establish conservation priorities, the programme used the updated Map of Priority Areas produced in 2007 under the coordination of the Department of Biodiversity Conservation of the Ministry of Environment (MMA/DCBio) and with technical and financial support from the ARPA Programme.

deforestation and climate changeThe ARPA played a key role in guaranteeing the planet’s climatic balance, through the maintenance of the Amazon’s native vegetation cover and aiding Brazil to fulfil its international climate commitments. Approximately 70% of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions are a result of deforestation and forest degradation. The estimated avoided emissions resulting from the protected areas covered by the ARPA up to 2050 represent 16% of global emissions in 2009, or 70% of the target for the first commitment period of the Kyoto

Protocol3. The expansion of protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon, to which ARPA made a considerable contribution, was responsible for 37% of the total reduction in deforestation in the region between 2004 and 2006 (during the phase I). A comparative analysis carried out by programme partners of 198 protected areas, based on the proportion of deforested area, reveals that the rate of deforestation is in fact lower in the protected areas supported by the ARPA than in protected areas not supported by the programme. The study goes on to show that avoided deforestation due to the programme’s protected areas is not “transferred” to other areas, i.e., there is no leakage4.

3 soares-filho, B.s.; dietzsch, l; falieri, a.; lanna, m.; maretti, c.; moutinho, P; Pinto, e.; rodrigues, H.; scaramuzza, c.; suassuna, K. and vasconcelos, f. 2009, reduction of carbon emissions from deforestation in Brazil: the role of the amazon region Protected areas programme (arPa), ufmG, iPam, The Woods Hole research center, WWf-Brasil.

4 WWf-Brasil 2012. arPa – a new path towards conserving the amazon..

BIOLOGICAL REsERVE TROmBETAs | © CARLOS AUGUSTO18 19

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)

PhAse ii

ExTRACTIVE REsERVE RIO CAjARI | © LEONARDO VIANNA MOHR20

A s part of the restructuring of the programme in phase II, the Brazilian

government produced a concept document to direct activities and formalise arrangements between the MMA and government agencies responsible for the management of protected areas. ARPA’s reach increased to 60 million hectares, while the number of protected areas increased from 64 to 95, resulting in an increase of 52.6 million hectares of protected area. There was therefore an increase of 50% in the number

of protected areas compared to phase I, based on the optimism generated from the success of the first phase.

Phase II is currently under way, and intermediate protected area consolidation targets have already

been reached (23 million hectares in Tier 1 and nine million hectares in Tier 2, totalling 32 million hectares). The total amount of funds disbursed to ICMBio and state agencies in the period 2014/15 was in the order of R$60 million. Targets established for phase II include the creation of 13.5 million hectares of new strictly protected areas and areas managed for sustainable use and an endowment fund (FAP) capitalized with a minimum of US$70 million.

Gains made and operational difficulties during phase iiThe conta vinculada mechanism, created during phase I to facilitate the flow of resources to protected area managers, inspired other initiatives such the cartão combustível (fuel card) used by ICMBio (government agency responsible for the administration of federal protected areas).

Other positive points include the following: capacity building for protected area managers; advances made in the methodology used for defining priorities; biodiversity monitoring; establishment of systems to ensure integrated management; extent of public participation in the programme, through increased participation of society in the SNUC and support for income generating activities in local communities.

ANAVILhANAs NATIONAL PARk | © ARqUIVO ICMBio22 23

The ARPA also contributed towards:

• setting important standards and criteria for the management of protected areas in Brazil,• improved coordination and communication between the MMA and Amazon states, • the management of protected areas at a regional scale.• the development of an innovative model for the implementation of the SNUC which

serves as inspiration for other projects, such as the Projeto Terra do Meio (midlands project), GEF-Mar (the Global Partnership for Oceans) and LifeWeb.

However, it is necessary to ensure improvements in the integrated use of programme tools, together with the tools used by the managing agencies, and in coordination and communication between partners. It is also important to highlight the inherent difficulties of implementing a programme of this scale in the Brazilian Amazon, particularly with respect to the cost of activities and logistical problems in remote areas related to distance, poor access and lack of infrastructure. During phase II, the difficulties faced in reaching FAP and protected area creation targets inspired discussions to develop a new financial strategy (Transition Fund) for phase III, where it became evident that the advances already made by the ARPA could only be guaranteed in the long term with public funding, thus requiring a long term, planned and organised commitment from the government to maintain the protected areas supported by the ARPA.

The difficulties related to the FAP emerged partly due to changes in the global macroeconomic climate related to the economic crisis in 2007 and 2008, whose effects continue to be felt today. After the crisis,

the stability of the Brazilian economy meant that the country was promoted to the group of the 10 largest economies in the world. However, parallel to this, the fund suffered from a reduction in dividends and overall returns received from investments. The first factor meant that Brazil was no longer eligible to receive non-repayable grants, and donors were inclined towards lending.

after the crisis, the stability of the Brazilian economy meant that the country was promoted to the group of the 10 largest economies in the world

sERRA DO PARDO NATIONAL PARk | © ADRIANO GAMBARINI24 25

PhAse iii

TUmUCUmAqUE NATIONAL PARk | © LEONARDO MILANO-ICMBio26

i n light of the advances of phase II, a series of new donors approached the programme with

an innovative financial arrangement to provide for the long term maintenance of the protected areas, which was the object of a memorandum of understanding signed during Rio+20 in 2012. Considering the global economic scenario and the donor countries’ posture towards Brazil – no longer viewing the country as a grant recipient – the agreement proposed a new financial strategy to address the shortfall in public funding to cover the financial resources currently provided through grants.

A Transition Fund with an estimated value of around US$215 million5 was created thanks to a major fundraising effort. Amounts were based on accurate financial modelling of the costs involved in consolidating and maintaining the 60 million hectares of protected areas supported by the ARPA, incorporating realistic financial projections and

budget increase scenarios in order to lessen the long term impact of the transition from donations to reliance on the public purse, and guaranteeing a 3.9% annual increase in public funding over the next 25 years and replacing the endowment arrangement of the Protected Area Fund.

Phase III was established by ministerial order of the MMA (Number 187, 22 May 2014) with a duration of 25 years and protected area consolidation target of 60 million hectares, maintaining support for the categories of protected areas covered by phase I and II. In addition, the ministerial order refers to the

need to establish financial and planning mechanisms to ensure the gradual allocation of financial resources to meet the implementation requirements of the protected areas during the stipulated period.

The programme’s governance arrangement is therefore undergoing a restructuring process with the creation of the Transition Fund Committee in addition to the Programme Committee. The main role of the Transition Fund Committee is to monitor programme performance and achievement of targets, forming a set of disbursement conditions that determine the volume

jURUENA NATIONAL PARk | © ADRIANO GAMBARINI

5 made possible by the signing of a memorandum of understanding on 21 may 2014 by the mma and representatives of arPa partners and donors including: icmBio, the German federal ministry for economic cooperation and development (BmZ), the inter-american development Bank (Bid), funbio, the Gordon and Betty moore foundation, WWf-Brasil, WWf-us, and the Global environment facility (Gef).

28 29

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)

of funds allocated during each biennial planning period.

This new arrangement has been brought into effect during the implementation of phase II, providing an initial sum of R$8.9 million for seven protected areas – two state (one in the State of Amazonas and the other in the State of Tocantins), and five federal areas – which achieved “consolidated status” during phase II and were chosen to receive support during phase III to maintain this status.

Programme evolutionThe ARPA has allowed Brazil to achieve significant conservation results in the Amazon. Furthermore, it has contributed to breaking organisational barriers by achieving the effective disbursement of financial resources during phase I and the beginning of phase II. Despite programme restructuring undertaken in phase II, this challenge was only recently overcome. Even with the restructuring of phase II, the challenge of organizational culture only recently was overcome.

Over the years, the ARPA has replaced the project approach with a programme approach. This fact is reflected by the commitments

assumed for phase III, including strengthening of planning and performance monitoring to ensure results – including greater stringency in presentation of accounts and results vis-à-vis protected area consolidation plans up to 2020, meeting protected area staffing goals, and counterpart funding requirements.

A new institutional arrangement has emerged which involves the Transition Fund Committee as a counterpart of the Programme Committee (CP), thus replacing the project-based approach with an integrated programme arrangement. Furthermore, the Planning Ministry is now formally represented on the Programme Committee and donor committee, facilitating the alignment of the ARPA with the federal government’s planning strategies.

There are nevertheless a number of challenges to be met, including the need to increase the level and pace of programme expenditure and maintain programme performance, regardless of the high level of managerial turnover, as experienced in the transition between phases I and II. Another important challenge is to increase the size of the UCP and managing agents’ teams to facilitate continuity of processes, since the high rate of staff turnover in the field negatively affects the economic efficiency of project implementation.

The proposal to improve programme execution and operation includes the following aspects: improved planning, including the organisation and provision of standard specifications for items of equipment and model terms of reference; procurement of service providers and suppliers located closer to the protected areas; integrated use of the Cérebro system with Funbio’s sistema RM (corporate management tool that encompasses accounting, payments, purchase and hiring); innovations in financial resource disbursement via contracts (fuel, maintenance, services); and capacity building activities (capacity building plan currently being developed).

VIRUá NATIONAL PARk | © NELSON YONEDA30

the AmAzon Region PRotected AReAs PRogR Amme (ARPA)